I’ve been following with interest various planning applications open for comment on the council’s planning access system relating to buildings I’ve written about before on this site. This week I wanted to mention two in particular, with brief reference to a third. The link is proposed demolition of the existing buildings, to make way for new developments. See what you think …
Carlton Tavern (former Godfrey Walker Home), 140 Acomb Road
17/00476/FULM | Erection of three-four storey 79no. bedroom care home with associated parking, cycle racks and landscaping following demolition of existing public house | The Carlton Tavern 140 Acomb Road York YO24 4HA
(Or search for the reference 17/00476/FULM in the search box at https://planningaccess.york.gov.uk/online-applications/ if the ‘planning access’ system is having an off day and the link above isn’t working.)
It’s cheering to see that there have been many objections to the proposed demolition of this building. We have to call it the Carlton Tavern as that’s its most recent name, but calling it the Carlton Tavern doesn’t do it justice. It’s only recently that it has been a pub/hotel of that name. It was built as a home, has a long history as a home/care home, and should be able to be reused in the plans for a 21st century care home.
I wrote about its history on an earlier page.
The Victorian Society and York Civic Trust have objected to the planning application.
Victorian Society comments (PDF). A few extracts from that document:
We object to the application, which would entail the total and unjustified loss of a locally significant building and harm to the quality and character of the local streetscape.
… with its generous proportions, richness of elevational treatment, tall chimneys and notable detailing, such as its attractive oriels and striking multi-paned windows, it is an accomplished and highly impressive edifice.
… The demolition of the Carlton Tavern would result in the total and unjustified loss of significance of a locally important historic building. We encourage the Council to inscribe the building on its Local List and ensure its preservation, in the first instance by refusing this inappropriate and harmful application.
York Civic Trust comments (PDF). Extracts from that objection:
… the building has a rich history relating to the urban development of western York and social care provision in the city, both of which have been overlooked in the proposal.
… The Carlton Tavern villa is the last of the four grand Victorian/Edwardian villas that once were seen along Acomb Road. … The proposed demolition of The Carlton Tavern would therefore erase all evidence of a style and size of Victorian / Edwardian properties that as a result of development and under appreciation are becoming increasingly hard to find examples of in York.
… the Trust would vigorously suggest a revision of the proposed scheme to use constructive conservation by incorporating the current Carlton Tavern building in its nursing home scheme. This could be realised by using The Carlton Tavern building as the desired communal space to the front of the development, and having new, residential space adjoined to it at the rear.
All the documents for the application can be found on this link.
Many local residents have also objected to the proposals.
If you’d like to add your own objections you can do so via that link above, or alternatively by email to email@example.com with the reference 17/00476/FULM: 140 Acomb Road. There’s more information on how to comment on this page on the council’s website.
Feel free to refer to/include the Victorian Society and York Civic Trust appraisals of the building in your comments — they are after all experts in recognising and promoting the value of historic buildings.
Hudson House, Toft Green
As previously mentioned briefly on an earlier page there’s a planning application also open for comment on plans to demolish Hudson House and redevelop the site. This is a change from an earlier plan to retain and refurbish.
Though it might seem that I always oppose demolition of buildings, in this case I don’t have strong feelings. If you do, or if you’re interested in reading more, the documents are here:
17/00576/FULM | Erection of 4 no. buildings comprising 127no. flats (C3), office (B1) use and office or restaurant (B1 or A3) uses following the demolition of existing office building | Hudson House Toft Green York YO1 6JT
(Or search for the reference 17/00576/FULM in the search box at https://planningaccess.york.gov.uk/online-applications/ if the ‘planning access’ system is having an off day and the link above isn’t working.)
The Design and Access statement (PDF) says of the existing building:
The present condition of the building is relatively poor, extensive repairs have been carried out to the external envelope to prevent the façade from further corrosion. Large areas of single glazing encourage the building to overheat during the summer months and lead to excessive heat loss during the winter months, this in turn undoubtedly puts a strain on the existing dated services. Services/ ductwork in need of replacement after 50 years of use.
Those of us who are of a similar age to this building might sympathise with it, and the strain on its dated services.
Though I was cheered to see that I/we (the comments on the page added further information) get an actual credit and link in another planning application document, the Heritage Impact assessment (PDF). It states
Hudson House was designed by S. Hardy of the British Rail Architects Department and was built between 1966 and 1970. It comprises four large interconnected blocks in a ‘pin-wheel’ plan around a courtyard. Blocks A and B, closest to the City Wall are four storeys, while blocks C and D, bordering Toft Green, are six storeys although it reads as five storeys above a sunken ground floor. Constructed of pre-fabricated concrete faced with granite chippings, it is designed in the Brutalist style with simple, regular fenestration and minimal decorative intervention. Although apparently, originally pale and similar in colour to the City Wall, (1) it is now dark brown in colour, contrasting with the red and pale yellow bricks employed by neighbouring buildings.
The (1) is a footnote, on page 6, and the footnote is a link to something I wrote a few years ago – Office block studies: Hudson House (2014). It was pleasing to see that recognition of the value of this website. It would be nice if more people linked to it in that way — rather than just using it for facts and photos without crediting the source, as is depressingly common.
But anyway, back to the plot …
A message from Ordnance Lane?
This week the planning application to demolish buildings on Ordnance Lane was officially withdrawn. I wrote about the proposed demolition a while back.
A reminder that public opposition to the destruction of heritage assets can make a difference, sometimes.
. . . . .
I’m trying to do my bit to recognise and promote aspects of local heritage here in York — particularly the less well-known aspects. I’ve been doing this work for many years. I want to continue to add useful, thoughtful, interesting content to this site. But this is unpaid work, and it involves a lot of time and effort. If you’d like to power more pages, here’s a way to do that, via my ‘buy me a coffee’ button, below.
Thanks to everyone who asked about supporting this site and to everyone whose support has powered recent pages.
(via ko-fi.com. “Ko-fi helps creators get support from people who love what they do”)